Solana's deterministic performance attracts founders who treat blockchain as a cloud computer, not a settlement layer. The network's sub-second finality and low, predictable fees enable stateful applications like real-time order books (Drift, Phoenix) and high-frequency DeFi that fail on EVM L2s.
solana-and-the-rise-of-high-performance-chains
Blog
Why Solana's Speed Attracts a Different Breed of Founder
An analysis of how Solana's sub-second finality and low fees create a unique technical environment, attracting founders building novel consumer and HFT applications that are impossible on slower, costlier EVM chains.
introduction
THE PERFORMANCE THRESHOLD
Introduction
Solana's architectural design creates a unique environment that filters for founders building applications previously impossible on other chains.
This filters out speculative token projects and prioritizes engineers solving latency-bound problems. Founders on Solana compete on product execution, not just tokenomics, because the base layer does not bottleneck user experience. The ecosystem's tooling, like Seahorse for Python devs and the native Clock/Timestamp, reflects this builder-first ethos.
Evidence: The 2023-24 cycle saw Solana dominate in consumer apps (Tensor, Dialect) and DeFi volume, processing over 100M non-vote transactions in a single day—a throughput that makes micro-transactions and frequent state updates economically viable.
key-trends
THE THROUGHPUT PARADIGM
Executive Summary
Solana's architectural choices create a performance envelope that fundamentally alters the scope of what's possible to build on-chain.
01
The Problem: EVM's State Contention Bottleneck
EVM chains serialize transaction execution, creating a global state lock. This leads to predictable bottlenecks: high fees during demand and sub-100 TPS ceilings, making high-frequency applications non-viable.\n- Sequential Processing: One transaction at a time per block.\n- Gas Auctions: Users bid for limited block space, killing UX.
<100
Peak TPS
$50+
Gas Spikes
02
The Solution: Parallel Execution & Local Fee Markets
Solana's Sealevel runtime executes transactions in parallel across all cores, treating state as a read-write dataset. Combined with localized fee markets, this enables ~50k TPS and sub-second finality.\n- No Global Lock: Non-conflicting transactions run simultaneously.\n- $0.0001 Averages: Predictable, ultra-low costs at scale.
~50k
Theoretical TPS
400ms
Block Time
03
The Founder Archetype: Building the Previously Impossible
This performance envelope attracts founders from high-frequency trading, gaming, and social who previously viewed blockchain as a non-starter. They build products where the chain is the backend, not a settlement layer.\n- HFT DEXs: Phoenix, Jupiter's LFG launchpad.\n- On-Chain Games: Star Atlas, Aurory.\n- Compressed NFTs: Minting 100M NFTs for <$100k.
100M
cNFTs Minted
$0.0025
Avg. Swap Cost
04
The Infrastructure Flywheel: Jito, Helius, Firedancer
Performance begets specialized infra. Jito's MEV capture funds validator staking. Helius's RPCs offer sub-100ms responses. Firedancer aims for 1M+ TPS. This creates a moat that generic L2s cannot match.\n- Specialized RPCs: Essential for real-time apps.\n- Validator Profitability: >$300M in Jito SOL staked.
<100ms
RPC Latency
$300M+
JTVL
market-context
THE FOUNDER MINDSET
The Performance Gap: More Than Just TPS
Solana's raw throughput attracts founders building products that are architecturally impossible on fragmented, high-latency L2s.
Founders choose architectures based on the chain's performance envelope. Solana's single-state design enables real-time global composability, a prerequisite for applications like Hivemapper's live mapping or Drift's perpetual swaps. On Ethereum's L2s, cross-rollup latency and bridging costs fracture this state.
The development paradigm diverges. Solana's synchronous execution allows for atomic, multi-program transactions, letting protocols like Jupiter and Tensor build complex, interdependent logic in a single block. This contrasts with the asynchronous, message-passing model of Optimism or Arbitrum, which adds complexity.
Evidence: Drift Protocol processes over $20B in monthly volume, with liquidations and funding payments executing in sub-second finality. This performance profile is a non-negotiable requirement for its product, not an optimization.
WHY SOLANA'S SPEED ATTRACTS A DIFFERENT BREED OF FOUNDER
The Latency & Cost Reality Check
Comparing the fundamental economic and performance constraints that define viable application design across leading L1s.
| Application Constraint | Solana | Ethereum L1 | Ethereum L2 (Optimistic) |
|---|---|---|---|
Time-to-Finality (Avg) | < 2 seconds | ~12 minutes | ~1 week (7-day challenge period) |
Cost per Simple Swap (Current) | < $0.001 | $5 - $15 | $0.25 - $0.75 |
Cost per NFT Mint (10k Collection) | < $50 | $15,000 - $50,000+ | $500 - $2,000 |
Max Theoretical TPS (Sustained) | ~5,000 | ~15 | ~2,000 (post-fraud proof) |
Atomic Composable Blockspace | |||
Native Fee Markets (Per App) | |||
Viable for Sub-Second HFT | |||
Viable for Mass Consumer Social |
deep-dive
THE ARCHITECTURAL DIVIDE
The Founder's Calculus: When EVM is a Non-Starter
Solana's monolithic design attracts founders building applications that are impossible on EVM's fragmented execution model.
Solana's monolithic state enables atomic composability across the entire network. EVM rollups like Arbitrum and Optimism fragment liquidity and logic, forcing developers to manage bridges like Across or Stargate as a core dependency.
High-frequency applications are EVM-native impossibilities. A decentralized order book like Phoenix or Drift requires sub-second finality and cross-margin atomic execution. EVM's block times and L2 sequencing delays create arbitrage windows that destroy the model.
The cost structure is inverted. Solana's fee market is per transaction, not per computational unit. This makes high-volume, low-margin micro-transactions—essential for social feeds or real-time gaming—economically viable, unlike on Ethereum L2s where calldata costs dominate.
Evidence: Jupiter Exchange processes more swap volume than Uniswap on Ethereum L1, demonstrating that application-level throughput attracts users when the base layer doesn't impose artificial constraints.
case-study
THE SPEED-TO-MARKET ADVANTAGE
Case Studies: Speed as a Prerequisite
Solana's sub-second finality and low fees enable application designs that are impossible on slower chains, attracting founders who build for the next billion users.
01
The Problem: High-Frequency Trading is Impossible on Ethereum
On-chain HFT requires sub-second execution and micro-penny fees. Ethereum's ~12-second block time and high gas costs make this a non-starter.\n- Solution: Drift Protocol built a perpetual DEX with ~400ms oracle updates and $0.0001 fees.\n- Result: Captured ~$2B+ peak TVL and ~$30B+ monthly volume, competing directly with centralized exchanges.
~400ms
Oracle Latency
$0.0001
Avg. Trade Cost
02
The Problem: Social Apps Choke on Gas and Latency
Web2 social experiences are real-time and free. On-chain alternatives on Ethereum fail due to slow interactions and prohibitive minting costs.\n- Solution: Dialect built smart messaging with instant message finality and sponsored transactions.\n- Result: Enabled token-gated chats and on-chain notifications that feel native, not like a blockchain app.
<1s
Message Finality
$0.002
Tx Cost
03
The Problem: DePIN Needs Real-Time Device Coordination
Decentralized Physical Infrastructure Networks (DePIN) like Helium require constant, cheap micro-transactions between IoT devices and the chain.\n- Solution: Helium Migration to Solana enabled millions of devices to settle on-chain for fractions of a cent.\n- Result: Unlocked real-time data transfer payments and subsidized hardware costs, creating a viable economic model.
~0.000005 SOL
Device Tx Cost
Millions
On-Chain Devices
04
The Problem: Gaming Economies Can't Scale with $10 Fees
Play-to-earn and fully on-chain games require thousands of micro-transactions per session. Ethereum L2s improve cost but not throughput enough.\n- Solution: Star Atlas runs its entire game economy on Solana, with NFT asset trades and resource harvesting settling in under a second.\n- Result: Created a persistent, composable game world where economic actions are seamless, not a bottleneck.
1000s
Txs/Session
<1s
Action Finality
05
The Problem: CLOB DEXs Lose to AMMs on Slower Chains
Central Limit Order Books (CLOBs) provide superior liquidity for professional traders but require high throughput and low latency.\n- Solution: OpenBook (a Serum fork) and Phoenix offer C++ on-chain order books with continuous auction matching.\n- Result: Enabled institutional-grade spot trading with tight spreads, a market structure dominated by AMMs elsewhere.
~0.5s
Order Placement
~0.01%
Typical Spread
06
The Problem: Intent-Based Systems Need Instant Settlement
Projects like UniswapX and CowSwap use solvers to find optimal trade routes, but slow settlement on Ethereum L1/L2s creates user experience friction.\n- Solution: Jupiter Exchange aggregates across Solana's entire liquidity landscape and settles limit orders & DCA trades in one block.\n- Result: ~$1B+ daily volume facilitated by providing the fastest possible execution for complex user intents.
1 Block
Settlement Time
~$1B+
Daily Volume
counter-argument
THE FOUNDER'S CALCULUS
The Trade-Offs: Decentralization, Complexity, and Risk
Solana's performance-first design attracts founders who prioritize execution speed over ideological purity, accepting a different set of trade-offs.
Solana prioritizes performance. The network's single global state and parallel execution via Sealevel VM enable sub-second finality, a requirement for consumer applications like Hivemapper or Drift Protocol that cannot tolerate Ethereum's 12-second block times.
This demands operational complexity. Founders must manage RPC infrastructure, handle potential network congestion, and build with the expectation of eventual forks, a reality that firms like Helius and Triton exist to mitigate.
The decentralization trade-off is explicit. Compared to Ethereum's distributed validator set, Solana's validation is more centralized among fewer, high-performance nodes. Founders accept this for the user experience, betting on Nakamoto Coefficient improvements over time.
Evidence: The 2022 FTX collapse demonstrated Solana's systemic risk from concentrated capital, yet developer retention remained above 70%, proving the founder cohort's risk tolerance for a high-throughput chain.
takeaways
FOUNDER ATTRACTION
The New Frontier
Solana's architectural edge is not just a technical spec; it's a new design space that enables previously impossible applications.
01
The Problem: Stateful DeFi is Impossible on Slow Chains
High-frequency strategies like on-chain order books or dynamic AMMs require sub-second state updates and atomic composability. Ethereum's 12-second blocks and fragmented L2s make this non-viable, ceding the market to centralized exchanges.\n- Enables: Phoenix, Drift Protocol, and HXRO's on-chain order books.\n- Metric: ~400ms slot time vs. Ethereum's 12s.
~400ms
Slot Time
Atomic
Composability
02
The Solution: Compress Everything into a Single Atomic Unit
Solana treats the block as a global state machine. Transactions touching dozens of contracts (e.g., a Jupiter swap routing through 10+ pools) are executed and settled in one atomic step. This eliminates MEV from failed bundles and unlocks complex, interdependent logic.\n- Enables: Jupiter's perps, MarginFi's cross-margin, and Kamino's leveraged vaults.\n- Contrast: Ethereum's rollup-centric future fragments liquidity and composability.
Single
State Machine
~$0.001
Tx Cost
03
The Problem: User Experience is Fractured by Gas and Confirmation Times
Founders building consumer apps face a UX ceiling. Gas token requirements and multi-minute wait times for on-chain actions kill retention. This limits apps to degens and whales, not mainstream users.\n- Blocked Use Cases: Real-time gaming, micropayments, social feeds.\n- Result: Apps abstract the chain away (Magic Eden's compression) or don't get built.
<1 sec
Finality
Sub-cent
Fees
04
The Solution: Fee Abstraction & Parallel Execution as a Primitive
Solana's low, predictable fees allow sponsors to pay for users (see versioned transactions). Combined with Sealevel parallel execution, apps can batch thousands of interactions (e.g., a game tick) without congesting the network or pricing out users.\n- Enables: Dialect's chat, Tensor's NFT trading, and Helium's IOT data.\n- Foundation: Parallelism is a first-class feature, not an L2 afterthought.
10k+
TPS Capacity
Sponsored
Transactions
05
The Problem: Data Availability is a Bottleneck for On-Chain AI
Machine learning models require feeding large datasets and generating outputs within a reasonable runtime. Storing and accessing this data on-chain is prohibitively expensive and slow on most VMs, making on-chain AI/ML a fantasy.\n- Blocked Use Cases: Autonomous agents, verifiable inference, on-chain training.\n- Status: Projects like io.net for compute highlight the demand, but execution is off-chain.
PB-scale
Data Need
Seconds
Runtime Limit
06
The Solution: Solana as the State Layer for Parallel Compute
Solana's architecture—massive parallel execution and high-throughput state updates—makes it the only chain that can realistically serve as a coordination and settlement layer for decentralized compute networks. The chain can handle the orchestration and payment flows for GPU clusters at scale.\n- Enables: Render Network migration, io.net settlement, future verifiable AI.\n- Vision: The blockchain becomes the operating system for global compute.
Parallel
Execution
Settlement
Layer
ENQUIRY
Get In Touch
today.
Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.
NDA Protected
Confidentiality24h Response
Time to ValueDirectly to Engineering Team
No Sales Fluff10+
Protocols Shipped
$20M+
TVL Overall